Ex-SC Judge Justice Nariman Slams SIR Voter Deletions and EC Appointment System

• by Akanksha Mishra
• 2026-10-05 15:04:00

Sounding a stern constitutional alarm against institutional vulnerabilities, former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman declared that Indian democracy is facing a "grave danger" fueled by the mass, illegal disenfranchisement of genuine voters and the central government's unchecked dominance over the appointment of Election Commissioners. Delivering a lecture on 'Constitution and the Common Man' at Rajkumar College in Rajkot, the eminent jurist voiced deep concern over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) controversy and the alleged unilateral actions within the Election Commission of India (ECI). Highlighting that an overwhelming majority of struck-off voters in West Bengal had their disenfranchisement reversed upon legal scrutiny, Justice Nariman urged the Supreme Court to intervene decisively, rectify systemic institutional failures, and restore the Chief Justice of India's role in the selection panel choosing the country's poll watchdogs.

Massive Disenfranchisement in Bengal: 93% Deletions Overturned Upon Appeal

The former Supreme Court judge highlighted striking empirical evidence to demonstrate how ordinary citizens are arbitrarily purged from electoral rolls:

Staggering Figures of Disenfranchisement: Justice Nariman revealed that an estimated 9 million (90 lakh) voters were disenfranchised during elections in West Bengal, a scale of mass exclusion that poses an existential threat to democratic franchise.

Overwhelming Judicial Reversals: Out of those denied the fundamental right to vote, roughly 2.2 million citizens managed to file formal appeals, with nearly 93% to 100,000 adjudicated cases decided in favor of the voters, proving conclusively that their names had been struck off illegally without valid justification.

Injustice to Marginalized Citizens: He emphasized that the remaining millions who could not challenge their removal were simply ordinary citizens lacking the financial means, legal literacy, or institutional access to knock on the doors of the judiciary.

Targeted Harassment of the Common Man: Justice Nariman characterized this systemic deletion as outright harassment of Indian citizens designed to alter electoral outcomes, describing the resulting administrative upheaval as deeply troubling for the nation's democratic foundations.

Executive Control Over Poll Body: The Primary Threat to Constitutional Independence

Focusing on institutional architecture, the jurist identified the current appointment mechanism of the Election Commission as fundamentally compromised:

Executive Monopoly Over Appointments: Justice Nariman criticized the legislative setup that left the selection of Election Commissioners entirely in the hands of the executive government of the day, depriving the constitutional watchdog of its non-partisan character.

Judicial Split and Constitution Bench: Referring to recent legal battles, he noted with regret that a split opinion between two judges led the critical question of appointment autonomy to be referred to a larger Constitution Bench of five judges, leaving executive dominance operational in the interim.

The Danger of Unilateral Functioning: Pointing to mounting controversies surrounding unilateral decisions taken by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, he warned that a pliable commission that operates without consensus or internal accountability strikes directly at free and fair elections.

Tripartite Selection Panel: Restoring CJI's Role to Safeguard the Common Man's Vote

Proposing an immediate structural remedy, Justice Nariman called for a neutral, tripartite collegium to select future election commissioners:

Reinstating the Chief Justice in Selection: The former jurist insisted that the selection committee must mandatorily comprise the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (or a nominated senior SC judge) to eliminate political bias.

Shortlisting Based on Integrity: He asserted that only an independent, balanced committee can properly evaluate and shortlist nominees who will ensure that the common man's vote is counted accurately and translated into genuine democratic representation.

Hope in the Apex Court: Expressing faith in his former institution as the Supreme Court takes up petitions regarding the SIR process and CEC conduct, Justice Nariman stated that the top court must step in without delay to correct structural errors before public faith in the electoral process erodes completely.

Previous Post

India's major success, DRDO successfully tests hypersonic missile technology

Next Post

The Facts Behind Supreme Court Validated SIR Voter Roll Revision